1. Field of the Invention:
The present invention relates to a universal fertilizer (or other material) spreader which may be attached to any type of lawnmower, be it self-propelled or not and also allows for removal/reinstallation on same or other types or sizes of lawnmowers as deemed useful. The system of the invention also includes two separate devices, a handle lock, which locks the handle in position and prevents accidental spillage of the fertilizer during operation, and a mounting tool provided to assist the user in mounting and attaching the hopper unto the lawnmower.
2. Prior Art:
In the past, prior attempts at fertilizer/chemical/seed spreaders have primarily been confided to two entirely separate types of devices. One type, in which mowing and fertilizing are achieved as two separate tasks, requiring a separate spreader and mower, is essentially a repetitive, time consuming process in which the operations must be performed as two separate steps and not simultaneously. The other type (such as P. G. Redman, U.S. Pat. No. 3,100,371), an add on type, has primarily dealt with integration of the spreader with the lawnmower, in that the fertilizer is fed through the blade housing and distributed primarily by the action of the lawnmower blade while turning. This type affords two primary disadvantages:
(1) the spreader becomes permanently attached to and is part of the lawnmower; and
(2) allows for contact between the fertilizer/chemicals and the mower and/or rotary blade assembly, thereby allowing corrosive/chemical reactions on the lawnmower itself to take place. This leads to possible early failure of the lawnmower and/or the blade assembly. It is also highly doubtful that the action of the blades in this type of device is sufficient in obtaining adequate spreading of the fertilizer.
Other attempts (A. P. Vicendese et al. U.S. Pat. No. 3,942,308) have been to combine the lawnmower and spreader into one entity, but these suffer the disadvantages in that the spreader assembly is integrated with the lawnmower itself and cannot be removed and attached to another lawnmower.
One attempt at a spreader (A. G. Troka, et al., U.S. Pat. No. 3,102,375) which is detachable has three shortcomings:
(1) it is not readily adaptable to lawnmowers of different widths;
(2) has a fixed spread width; and
(3) is located rearwards of the rear wheel, thereby moving the center of gravity farther back, so that upon filling of the hopper, possible tilting of the lawnmower will take place with corresponding spillage of the contents of the hopper being possible.
Other attempts at removable spreaders have relied on the vibration and swinging movements of the handle to provide for spreading of the contents. This type of system has obvious flaws in that the spread of the fertilizer is very erratic and uneven, and little control over the fertilizing process is possible.
In R. N. Kelly's spreader (U.S. Pat. No. 2,639,571) control of spreading is achieved by the blades of a rotary blade lawnmower periodically engaging an arm, which in turn swings a door open while moving agitator pins back and forth, to achieve spreading of the contents. The disadvantages of this type of spreader are:
(1) operable only with rotary blade lawnmowers;
(2) has a fixed width of spread of fertilizer;
(3) has a complicated mechanical device which would be prone to failure; and
(4) moves the center of gravity farther backwards which makes possible spilling of the contents.
The shortcomings of the prior art show the need for a spreader which is universally adaptable for use for example with push or powered mowers of the non-rider type. The system should also provide for adjustment of fertilizer spread width and should be adaptable to all width mowing machines. The system should also allow for control of the rate at which fertilizer is spread and allow for no contact between the fertilizer and the lawnmower to prevent corrosive/chemical attack of the lawnmower. Also the system should not substantially alter the center of balance of the lawnmower in a negative fashion and both provide for moving the spreader to other lawnmowers and allow for fertilizing to take place without the lawnmower being on. It is an aim of the present invention to fill all the shortcomings of the prior art and to meet the conditions as set forth in the above.
Prior U.S. patents which may be of interest are listed below:
______________________________________ Patentee (s) U.S. Pat. No. Issue Date ______________________________________ Alexander Konrad 3,097,467 July 16, 1963 C. W. Anderson 3,359,710 Dec. 26, 1967 L. Coffman 3,477,212 Nov. 11, 1969 A. P. Vicendese, et al 3,942,308 Mar. 9, 1976 P. C. Redman 3,100,371 1963 H. McCain 3,332,221 R. N. Kelly 2,639,571 May 26, 1953 C. F. McBride 2,974,963 Mar. 14, 1961 A. G. Troka, et al 3,102,375 Sep. 3, 1963 V. H. Peoples Re 24,189 July 31, 1956 ______________________________________
The Peoples patent is directed to an independent spreader, while the other patents show variations of some form of spreader or dispenser associated with a lawnmower.